Re: Future of the PPP WG

On 9/9/2011 5:24 AM, Donald Eastlake wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> In case you were unaware, I am now the Chair of PPPEXT.

Thanks for mentioning it!

> 
> Generally, there has been little activity in this WG for some years.
> Although I believe it serves a useful purpose in examining PPP
> proposals, possibly that purpose could be served by just continuing
> the mailing list. In any case, it seems likely that, if the situation
> continues unchanged, the WG will be dissolved sometime early next
> year.
> 
> In the process of producing RFC 6361, it became very apparent that the
> PPP security RFCs, such as they are, meet few, if any, modern IETF
> security guidelines. 

Would these be realistic guidelines (such as RFC 3552 (but do you
consider that 'modern')) or pie-in-the-sky "in my dream world this is
how it would work" guidelines (like RFC 4962)?

> I believe that there should be an update of PPP
> security or, if an effort to update them fails for some reason, then
> at least old / inadequate / unimplemented PPP security RFCs should be
> declared historic.

Do you have a list of said RFCs?

> 
> My suggestion is that PPPEXT re-Charter to include a goal such as the
> above and I'm willing to try drafting a new Charter but welcome
> suggestions and comments on all this.
> 
> One question is, should PPPEXT have a 1 hour meeting at the November
> IETF meeting? I think that would be the best way to come to consensus
> on this but obviously only if enough people would plan to actually
> attend. So, I'd be interested in who is would attend and any opinions
> for or against such a meeting.

I would attend if I had no irreconcilable conflicts.
_______________________________________________
Pppext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pppext